A daft way to stop your Spaniel eating the Milkman
Discussion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm
Great
beeb said:
Every dog owner in the UK would have to take out insurance against their pet attacking someone under government proposals to tackle dangerous breeds.
Police and local councils could also get new powers to force the owners of dangerous dogs to muzzle them or even get them neutered.
Ministers say they are responding to public concern about vicious dogs being used to intimidate or threaten people.
Each week, more than 100 people are admitted to hospital after dog attacks.
There has also been a reported rise in levels of dog fighting and illegal ownership, particularly by gangs who are using dangerous dogs as status symbols.
So because someone does something that is already illegal they want to make me cough up more moneyPolice and local councils could also get new powers to force the owners of dangerous dogs to muzzle them or even get them neutered.
Ministers say they are responding to public concern about vicious dogs being used to intimidate or threaten people.
Each week, more than 100 people are admitted to hospital after dog attacks.
There has also been a reported rise in levels of dog fighting and illegal ownership, particularly by gangs who are using dangerous dogs as status symbols.
Great
Edited by thinfourth2 on Tuesday 9th March 07:39
"What good did all the airport legislation achieve? None. It simply means that you and I now must get to the airport six years before the plane is due to leave and arrive at the other end with yellow teeth, smelly armpits and no nail file. Did it prevent a chap from getting on board with exploding underpants? No, it did not."
I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.
I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.
yep, just heard it on the radio, another prime example of joined-up thinking by our esteemed leaders.
That'll be the cost for chipping the dog, then insurance (with it's associated insurance tax) to fork out. Oh goody, we'll need a few more civil servants to administer it, maybe some more Dog Wardens which we can train to walk the streets and inspect dogs. And what a cracking way to extract yet more tax from the paying classes !
Of course, it will never occur to the great and wise ones that instead of simply putting any violent dog down they could actually shove the same needle into the owner, which would sort out the problem once and for all. In fact forget the dog, just take out the thick so-n-so who owned it. Yeah, another Victor Meldrew moment.
But what amazes me most of all is how these idiots think that by introducing compulsory insurance they'll actually solve the problem. From what I see these dogs are bred and owned by thugs who think they're tough, most probably already on benefits and not likely to pay insurance premiums for anything, let alone a dog.
So yet again another case of people breaking the law which is compensated for by payments extracted from the law abiding citizens. Nice one Gordy.
That'll be the cost for chipping the dog, then insurance (with it's associated insurance tax) to fork out. Oh goody, we'll need a few more civil servants to administer it, maybe some more Dog Wardens which we can train to walk the streets and inspect dogs. And what a cracking way to extract yet more tax from the paying classes !
Of course, it will never occur to the great and wise ones that instead of simply putting any violent dog down they could actually shove the same needle into the owner, which would sort out the problem once and for all. In fact forget the dog, just take out the thick so-n-so who owned it. Yeah, another Victor Meldrew moment.
But what amazes me most of all is how these idiots think that by introducing compulsory insurance they'll actually solve the problem. From what I see these dogs are bred and owned by thugs who think they're tough, most probably already on benefits and not likely to pay insurance premiums for anything, let alone a dog.
So yet again another case of people breaking the law which is compensated for by payments extracted from the law abiding citizens. Nice one Gordy.
GuinnessMK said:
I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.
....now, of course, there are calls for parents who choose to educate their children at home to be monitored on an hourly basis by people from the “care” industry, and possibly to have their toiletries confiscated.Have an another!
GuinnessMK said:
"What good did all the airport legislation achieve? None. It simply means that you and I now must get to the airport six years before the plane is due to leave and arrive at the other end with yellow teeth, smelly armpits and no nail file. Did it prevent a chap from getting on board with exploding underpants? No, it did not."
I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.
No but it will get to the stage where everyone bar the real commited terrorists give up flying, in which case they will only end up blowing each other up! I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.
thinfourth2 said:
And could someone explian how having a dog insured will stop it eating the neighbours children?
It wont. In fact if you think about it, banning all dog insurace would be best, then encourage anyoppone attacked to sue the arse off the owner, and discourage crap and appathetic owners of dogs.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff